Hi
A note that the rendering of riverbank "Leie" between Kortrijk and
Wervik is gone.
In the past I added a lot of stuff there and it was good.
Had corrected several overlap riverbanks en controlled begin to end but
I do not know what to look after. The "Leie" is a natural border with France
Hi Frank
I've removed the area=no that was tagged on it. I think that was the cause, I
hope it renders again soon.
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 17:54 Jakka wrote:
> Hi
>
> A note that the rendering of riverbank "Leie" between Kortrijk and
> Wervik is gone.
> In the past I added a lot of stuff the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Area=no should not be needed on a riverbank. It's implied by creating
a closed way. The problem is elsewhere.
Glenn
On 28-07-16 18:00, Ruben Maes wrote:
> Hi Frank
>
> I've removed the area=no that was tagged on it. I think that was
> the cause,
Seems someone screwed up the Leie multipolygon relation pretty bad. I can deal
with it after dinner.
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 18:56 Glenn Plas wrote:
> Area=no should not be needed on a riverbank. It's implied by creating
> a closed way. The problem is elsewhere.
>
> Glenn
>
>
> On 28-07-16
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ik vraag me ook sterk af wat de bedoeling is van de 2de relatie die
ook Leie heet waarin enkel de riverbanks steken.
Als ik straks ga meten hoelang de Leie is adhv. deze data gaat dit
niet juist zijn.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1201127
e
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 19:34 Glenn Plas wrote:
> Ik vraag me ook sterk af wat de bedoeling is van de 2de relatie die
> ook Leie heet waarin enkel de riverbanks steken.
I believe someone tried to migrate to the natural=water scheme but didn't
remove the waterway=riverbank.
> Als ik straks ga m
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 28-07-16 20:10, Ruben Maes wrote:
> On donderdag 28 juli 2016 19:34 Glenn Plas wrote:
>> Ik vraag me ook sterk af wat de bedoeling is van de 2de relatie
>> die ook Leie heet waarin enkel de riverbanks steken.
>
> I believe someone tried to migrate
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 20:42 Glenn Plas wrote:
> On 28-07-16 20:10, Ruben Maes wrote:
> > On donderdag 28 juli 2016 19:34 Glenn Plas wrote:
> >> Ik vraag me ook sterk af wat de bedoeling is van de 2de relatie
> >> die ook Leie heet waarin enkel de riverbanks steken.
> >
> > I believe someone tri
Hey Ruben,
>> I do not see the merit of natural=water scheme at all on a river or a
>> canal. It's a waterway. imho, there is nothing to migrate to.
>> Unless I seriously missed something, the way to do it is the way (not
>> the area) is the logical waterway.
>
> Both have disadvantages. They a
Hi Glenn
We can do away with the relation and make sure waterway=riverbank is placed
everywhere. But this has seemed always strange to me: for canals as well? A
canal is not a river, and the wiki on waterway=riverbank says: "This describes
the tagging scheme for large rivers", linking to the Wi
Some background: the natural=water, water = x was proposed by Zverik.
His idea was to make it easy for mappers using aerial imagery to map
anything "water"-like with natural=water, eventually someone would add
the water=x detail. x, can be pond, stream, river, canal, oxbow, etc.
etc. [1] carto-css
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 28-07-16 21:42, Ruben Maes wrote:
> Hi Glenn
>
> We can do away with the relation and make sure waterway=riverbank
> is placed everywhere. But this has seemed always strange to me: for
> canals as well? A canal is not a river, and the wiki on
> wat
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 21:56 Glenn Plas wrote:
> No , not for canals, when I researched this became pretty clear this
> was only meant for rivers. But the Leie is a river so it's ok here.
Well that's weird, because there's a canal connected to the river and it also
needs cleaning, and we have
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 21:51 Marc Gemis wrote:
> Some background: the natural=water, water = x was proposed by Zverik.
> His idea was to make it easy for mappers using aerial imagery to map
> anything "water"-like with natural=water, eventually someone would add
> the water=x detail. x, can be p
Wat ik in dit hele verhaal compleet niet snap:
Waarom is e nu klapsplots zoveel te doen over het mappen van 1 rivier
(en dan nog *)
Waarom zou die Leie anders gemapt worden dan de Rijn of de Seine of de
Nete, Klein of Groot?
Verder bemoei ik me niet met de discussie, ze gaat duidelijk m
On 28-07-16 22:03, Ruben Maes wrote:
> On donderdag 28 juli 2016 21:56 Glenn Plas wrote:
>> No , not for canals, when I researched this became pretty clear this
>> was only meant for rivers. But the Leie is a river so it's ok here.
>
> Well that's weird, because there's a canal connected to the r
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 22:21 Glenn Plas wrote:
> On 28-07-16 22:03, Ruben Maes wrote:
> > On donderdag 28 juli 2016 21:56 Glenn Plas wrote:
> >> No , not for canals, when I researched this became pretty clear this
> >> was only meant for rivers. But the Leie is a river so it's ok here.
> >
> >
On 28-07-16 22:16, Karel Adams wrote:
> Wat ik in dit hele verhaal compleet niet snap:
>
> Waarom is e nu klapsplots zoveel te doen over het mappen van 1 rivier
> (en dan nog *)
Wat is uw definitie van 'veel' ? Beetje vage klacht. Gaat het over het
aantal mails, hoeveel we in de mails zette
Hehe, Glenn, zo'n openhartig antwoord apprecieer ik wel.
Wat ik eigenlijk bedoelde te zeggen: er moet toch ergens een "howto" of
een "preferred practice" zijn voor het mappen van een courant en
essentieel landschapselement als een rivier?
Enne, jawel, het ging er me over dat er op tijd van en
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 20:38 Karel Adams wrote:
> Wat ik eigenlijk bedoelde te zeggen: er moet toch ergens een "howto" of
> een "preferred practice" zijn voor het mappen van een courant en
> essentieel landschapselement als een rivier?
>
> Enne, jawel, het ging er me over dat er op tijd van e
On 28-07-16 22:38, Karel Adams wrote:
> Hehe, Glenn, zo'n openhartig antwoord apprecieer ik wel.
Ik heb geprobeerd het proper te houden met respect voor de mening van
ieder individu, vandaar dat ik me oprecht afvroeg wat 'veel' voor je
betekende. :)
> Wat ik eigenlijk bedoelde te zeggen: er moet
Mooie mail, Glenn :p
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 23:03 Glenn Plas wrote:
> (...)
> Beste dat je kan doen -denk ik toch- is al het engelstalige op de wiki
> naar nederlands/frans te 'porten' met de lokale gewoontes in acht te
> nemen. Ik geef toe dat het is zoals lego: je moet de stukjes zelf bij
>
Now back on topic: we have the Leie's banks back on the render.
On donderdag 28 juli 2016 17:54 Jakka wrote:
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/646584#map=17/50.82877/3.25798&layers=N
>
> Please feedback what and where was the cause
There were two places where there were problems with relation
Just some notes on waterway=river vs natural=water+water=river.
For me, a riverbank is either a line (a wall) separating the land from the
river, or a sloped land area with water-loving plants that can be inundated
when the water level rises.
When you describe the water of the river, you describe
bericht-
Van: Glenn Plas [mailto:gl...@byte-consult.be]
Verzonden: donderdag 28 juli 2016 23:03
Aan: OpenStreetMap Belgium
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-be] Rendering of stream "Leie" broken
Wat ik trouwens wel een grappige changeset comment vind is de problematische
way : https://www.openstr
ht-
> Van: Glenn Plas [mailto:gl...@byte-consult.be]
> Verzonden: donderdag 28 juli 2016 23:03
> Aan: OpenStreetMap Belgium
> Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk-be] Rendering of stream "Leie" broken
>
>
> Wat ik trouwens wel een grappige changeset comment vind is de
26 matches
Mail list logo
